steveherbe Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 'Friend of a friend' is related to Matt Oakley. I've just been told that Matt is LOVING not playing, and taking £8,000 per week for his troubles! Apparently he's happy as it gives him more time to concentrate on his outside interests (property development so I've been told). He's not been interested in playing for quite some time now - wonder if we can tear up his contract?
Kent Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 Just because he doesn't play on a Saturday doesn't mean he doesn't have to train all week. Seems like bollocks to me especially considering he's supposed to be a model professional.
steveherbe Posted 12 September 2011 Author Posted 12 September 2011 Hey, only passing on what I've been told. Sure he has to train, but i wonder if he's putting the effort in.
J.Lisemore Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 He probably knows his best days are well behind him now, hes still at a club like Leicester and hes being payed £8,000 a week...fair play to him.
Guest MattP Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 Can anyone give a thought out logical reason as to why Sven extended his contract last season?
Heart-Shaped Fox Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 Can anyone give a thought out logical reason as to why Sven extended his contract last season? Anyone give a logical reason for any decisions he makes?
m00nie Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 as much as i dont rate him this is a load of bollocks.. for a start i remember him winning the beep test in training.. hardly the effects of someone not trying..
sphericalfox Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 Can anyone give a thought out logical reason as to why Sven extended his contract last season? Because someone of his experience could be useful during training sessions, and good to have around the club, for the existing first teamers, the reserves and probably the youth team. Is that logical enough? What was the point in keeping Clemence around for all that time he didn't play?
Karljohn Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 Can anyone give a thought out logical reason as to why Sven extended his contract last season? Dunno mate, see Bruno Berner, Steve Howard etc too
Guest MattP Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 Because someone of his experience could be useful during training sessions, and good to have around the club, for the existing first teamers, the reserves and probably the youth team. Is that logical enough? What was the point in keeping Clemence around for all that time he didn't play? But in this position we have Fernandes, Abe, King, Wellens....these are all experienced professionals with some international experience. We can't surely be in a position where we are paying people £8,000 a week just to "hang around" the training ground as they might help out some of the youth team. It's just another decision that is truly baffling.
MrSpaM Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 Can anyone give a thought out logical reason as to why Sven extended his contract last season? Seems to be someone who can keep positivity up in the ranks, wouldn't surprise me if that's all he was kept on for to be honest
Bugg Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 I think Sven kept Oakley on as an extreme back-up in case we went through an awful injury crisis, I don't think we should have kept him on, but after he signed his year extension towards the end of the season he seemed to come into form. He might also have been taken on as a possible coach for the future as he might be a positive influence on the training field. Edit - Also, how do we even know he's on £8k per week? Cause someone heard it on the "grape vine"?
sphericalfox Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 But in this position we have Fernandes, Abe, King, Wellens....these are all experienced professionals with some international experience. We can't surely be in a position where we are paying people £8,000 a week just to "hang around" the training ground as they might help out some of the youth team. It's just another decision that is truly baffling. It's just another post that's baffling. Another opportunity to whinge about Sven. Oakley has experience of promotion out of this league. He's an excellent professional, shown by his efforts at the bleep test on the return to preseason. This is a good role model that in Sven and the owners eyes is good to have around. I'm not saying he'll ever get on the pitch this season, and certainly not ahead of the others listed. So i refer back to my logical account of why I think he's still about.
Guest MattP Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 It's just another post that's baffling. Another opportunity to whinge about Sven. Oakley has experience of promotion out of this league. He's an excellent professional, shown by his efforts at the bleep test on the return to preseason. This is a good role model that in Sven and the owners eyes is good to have around. I'm not saying he'll ever get on the pitch this season, and certainly not ahead of the others listed. So i refer back to my logical account of why I think he's still about. Should of given him a five year deal really. For what it's worth I can moan about Sven all I want while he continues to make strange decisions, like I have said in many posts I wouldnt even consider removing him until xmas, however he is not going to be immune from being called into question when he keeps on making daft decisions that are harming us on (and quite possibly off) the pitch.
sphericalfox Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 Should of given him a five year deal really. That's the spirit!
unreachable Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 I thought Oakley had a wine importing business and he must enjoy getting his wages without the responsibility and effort of playing competitive matches. Eriksson said last week that Oakley had refused offers for him to go out on loan as had Howard refused to go out on loan.
Walshy5 Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 Would have thought he,d be on a bit more than 8 grand a week
Corky Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 When he does play, no matter how well, he inevitably gets scapegoated so I'm not surprised he doesn't mind not playing.
smokey Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 'Friend of a friend' is related to Matt Oakley. I've just been told that Matt is LOVING not playing, and taking £8,000 per week for his troubles! Apparently he's happy as it gives him more time to concentrate on his outside interests (property development so I've been told). He's not been interested in playing for quite some time now - wonder if we can tear up his contract? Wine is his Business, never been a mention of property development! This friend of a friend reliable??
vandamman Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 Its not that far fetched. At the end of the day, its still a job for him. If I was being paid to just turn up to work but not do anything, I would be loving life!
funkyrobot Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 It's just another post that's baffling. Another opportunity to whinge about Sven. Oakley has experience of promotion out of this league. He's an excellent professional, shown by his efforts at the bleep test on the return to preseason. This is a good role model that in Sven and the owners eyes is good to have around. I'm not saying he'll ever get on the pitch this season, and certainly not ahead of the others listed. So i refer back to my logical account of why I think he's still about. There isn't a great deal of sense or logic in paying somebody £416000 a year because they do well in the bleep test and because they are good to have around as a positive influence. If Oakley isn't part of Sven's plans then he should be shipped out, like the younger and better players that Sven has already moved on.
sphericalfox Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 There isn't a great deal of sense or logic in paying somebody £416000 a year because they do well in the bleep test and because they are good to have around as a positive influence. If Oakley isn't part of Sven's plans then he should be shipped out, like the younger and better players that Sven has already moved on. Guess Clemence was a waste of money too. Howard will be a waste, Berner a waste. Just pissing money up the wall eh? Probably not using them in an coaching capacity, in everything but name I suppose. Sven did try to ship out a fair few extraneous players, but they were either not picked up or in Oakley's case turned down an offer. Saying they are useless an offer nothing to the team in my view is probably inaccurate. I have just pointed out a logical reason why I think they are still of use, regardless of the cost.
funkyrobot Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 Yes Clemence was a waste of money. Unfortunately for him this was due to an injury. Berner, as third choice left back behind Ball is both a waste of money and talent. Howard and Oakley are a waste of money. Logically, a highly paid footballer who isn't likely to get a game should be moved on. An illogical thing to do would be to extend the contracts of players and then not play them. Sven.
m00nie Posted 12 September 2011 Posted 12 September 2011 im actually one who agrees we should get rid but i dont agree with the original post saying oakley is happy to just sit and collect his paycheck not playing.. like him or not the guy has been professional in his job so cant see him just riding it out...
Thracian Posted 14 September 2011 Posted 14 September 2011 I'm sure I read some reference once to the need for football clubs not to be ageist any more than other organisations and, if so, giving contracts to people like Oakley, Berner, Howard would give them chance to show they are employing a proportion of "older" footballers. There is also an inclination among football people to look after their own. If there are owners prepared to pick up the tab then it serves as both a social service and a certain amount of cover within the squad.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.